I am a member of the Bilingual Professionals (English and French) group on LinkedIn. While i don't post much, I do enjoy some of theirs. Someone posted this article, which goes back to our discussion here on Wordcraft about language affecting our culture.

We have already, successfully I think, provided evidence here on WC to debunk the Whorfian hypothesis. However, this article had one intriguing fact; in the Scientific American they talk about an Amazonian Community (Pirahã) that has no numbers and only talks about quantity in terms of "hói to describe a small number of objects, hoí to describe a slightly larger number, and baágiso for an even larger number." Have you heard of this before?

We've discussed Pirahã before.

Why the Pirahã don't count is anyone's guess. Maybe they're not interested.

They've got the wrong Whorf: he was on Star Trek.

As usual, Goofy, some great links. Thanks! I always get stuck in Language Log because I click all their links, and then all their links, etc.!

I liked the beginning of the Language Log post when he points out that is really is the Sapir-Whorfian hypothesis and that the actual hypothesis is not that language determines thought (linking to the Keywords Blog). Those kind of mistakes happen all the time in academia. Someone misunderstands a research study, but writes about it (poor peer reviews), and then it's published. Others read paper B, cite from it, and on and on so that the original paper A is totally misrepresented. You must read the original article, as the Keywords Blog says.

Sorry, Kalley, Whorfian is a blood thinner and rat poison.

Just don't let your rats get into your vitamin K.